Fases de la investigación acción

In all qualitative studies, the rigour of the research is concerned with reliability and validity of the research which includes the appropriateness of the qualitative method and the visibility and accountability of the research data (Davies & Dodd, 2002; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Credibility, dependability, confirmability and transferability as outlined by Lincoln and Guba (1985) are standards of displaying trustworthiness in qualitative designs and were used to ensure rigor in this study.

117 Credibility means producing data from the research that is convincing or reliable from the viewpoint of the people involved in the research. The data must be able to capture and describe an emic or insider (participant) point of view, as well as remaining true to the findings (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2014; Milne & Oberle, 2005). In the context of this study, emic refers to the organisation and interpretation of data provided by the people being studied (Liamputtong, 2010). The researcher for this study checked the transcripts of the interviews with the audiotapes to ensure no discrepancies existed between the audio version and the written word. A consensus of the categories being developed was reached through agreement with another researcher. Regular meetings were held with the researcher’s supervisors, who challenged any interpretations relating to the formation of categories, sub-themes and themes. This type of peer inspection throughout the data analysis stage assisted in strengthening the credibility of the emerging findings of the study.

Transferability describes whether a study’s findings and conclusions can be transferred to other similar situations. Therefore, an in-depth description of where the study is undertaken, that is, the context of the study is necessary to enable “transferability inferences” (Shenton, 2004, p. 69). Lincoln and Guba (1985) recommended the need for “a full description of all the contextual factors impinging on the inquiry”, thereby allowing readers of the phenomena under investigation to decide whether conclusions are transferable to other settings or situations (p. 65). The use of a ‘thick

118 description’ of the research field experiences as opposed to a thin description also allows for the explicit context of the research (Holloway, 1997).

Dependability involves the ability to show that the findings of a study are able to be repeated and are consistent, allowing an evaluation of the data to confirm accuracy of the findings. This accuracy will confirm whether the interpretations and conclusions are or have been supported by the data (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Confirmability involves the use of an audit trail of the research path, including the decisions of research design, data collection and the stages of management, analysis and reporting of the data. This trail also encompasses raw data such as field notes, how themes, sub-themes and concepts were constructed and synthesised; personal reflexive notes and observations (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Malterud, 2001). In this study, the role of the second researcher was to confirm emerging categories, sub-themes and themes from the raw data. Information has been provided not only about the way in which the data were collected but also about the process used for analysis and interpretation of the data. The researcher kept memos regarding developing categories, sub-themes and themes. These memos formed an audit trail of how the researcher made judgements and decisions throughout data analysis and interpretation.

119

4.10 Reflexivity

The use of reflection has been considered a necessary component of qualitative research because researchers need to reflect and undertake self-scrutiny on their own values and beliefs. Reflexive researchers also try to understand the participants’ views in the context in which they occurred, making them explicit (Long & Johnson, 2000; McMillan & Schumacher, 2010). The researcher’s background can shape the research from the inception of the idea through to choice of method and the report of the findings and conclusions. Therefore, the background of the researcher needs to be acknowledged and whether this may influence the research process and interpretation of the data (Blignault & Ritchie, 2009; Schutt, 2011). For this study, in my case, I have a nursing background and I have not worked clinically for several years and have worked with a vulnerable population in the mental health area. Self-reflectivity incorporates discussion concerning assumptions and experiences of data collection with others, for example, supervisors (Dowling, 2007).

In this study, the use of memos and a diary of events helped the researcher reflect on all parts of the research process, especially interpretation of findings, to remain faithful to the experience of the participants. The process of journal writing support the process of self-reflection and are used to examine and monitor reactions, expectations, thoughts and feelings throughout the research process (Simons, 2009). Also, bracketing

120 and being aware of one’s own assumptions and preconceptions lessens the likelihood of bias being incorporated into the findings (Newton, Rothlingova, Gutteridge, LeMarchand, & Raphael, 2011). In addition, the stereotypical images or negative publications of people who are or have been homeless needed to be acknowledged and then set aside (incorporating bracketing) while writing and being immersed in the findings. As noted within this section, and within this study, credibility, dependability, confirmability and transferability of the findings were established to support trustworthiness of the findings.